Way back in 2001, I took a look at the cumulative
standings for 1991-2000. Since we passed a round number last year, I
thought I'd revisit that question and see what had changed. I'll just hit
these conference-by-conference, so I'll be sure not to just skip over
anyone.

There are several of these teams that serve as a reminder of the tiering
that occurs within the ranks of the conferences. Delaware dominated the
AmEast to the point where they began to be thought of as a regional power;
they never got a #1 seed out of it, but they got some reasonably favorable
treatment in the late '90's. They're two games over .500 so far in the
CAA.

There's not a whole lot of change between these and the 91-00 standings.
UNC has moved up 21 games relative to .500 in the last five years, which
isn't bad in a conference this strong. NCSU, on the other hand, has moved
down 24 games. I suspect that there will be a good bit of churning before
the 01-10 standings, though; the addition of Miami and a resurgence at
Clemson means that someone has to lose some games.

Well, that was a fun party while it lasted. Right now, it looks like the
next five years view for the ASun is going to be a bit of a tossup, with
two of the three traditional powers leaving the party while Troy has
started paying attention to baseball and two Division II powers are
roaring in (between them, North Florida and Kennesaw State already have
wins over Washington State, Boston College, Georgia Southern, LSU, South
Florida, and a sweep over Central Florida). Compounding that is the fact
the new guys won't be postseason-eligible until 2010 and don't have anything
to play for *but* the regular season, and it's going to be an interesting
ride. This is somewhat similar to the chaotic state five years ago, when
newcomer Jacksonville and recently-departed Florida International had been
the top teams in that window.

Richmond was a good pick-up here, and they're in essentially the same boat
here they were in in the CAA, so it didn't hurt them any. Virginia Tech
has stepped off the deep end; we'll see if they float in a few years.
The addition of more southern teams seems to have really hurt UMass, who
has dropped by 36 games relative to .500 since 2000. It's been almost
completely ignored nationally, since they haven't actually made it to the
top of what is, after all, only a lower mid-level conference, but Rhode
Island's move from 57-139 from 1991-2000 to 112-107 from 1996-2005 is a
fairly impressive success story.

Hmmm, let's see. Notre Dame still winning most of their games? Check.
Georgetown still really bad? Check. Villanova's swooned a bit and BC
had a nice year or two, but this is probably the most static of the
leagues in terms of changes in the last five years. So, of course, they
replaced half the conference.

Minnesota hasn't improved as much as Ohio State has slipped, but this is
another fairly static grouping over all compared to five years ago.
Michigan hasn't changed places, but they're up about 20 games relative
to .500. They've got the resources, so they may be the next candidate
to watch in looking for a regional power (or a de facto IAA power, if Jim
Delaney gets his wish).

Remember when Texas was bad? They've gone from 3 games over .500 for the
first four years of the conference to second place on this list. I don't
think they'll catch Baylor this year (and might even lose a little ground),
but the Bears have to be hearing hoofprints. On other fronts, a great
point that weather never actually evens out is that Texas A&M, for example,
has managed to play an average of about a game-and-a-half more in conference
per year than Nebraska has.

For a top 5 league, which has been as high as second some years, that's
a whole bunch of turnover. Only 4 teams showed up for the whole 10 years.
It's Fullerton's show, with Long Beach playing a strong second fiddle.

Here's a great example of the limits of observation, even when considering
a pool of data: I would have sworn that East Carolina owned this league.
It turns out that they were behind VCU for both the 91-00 period and for
the 96-05 period.

This one was debatable as recently as two years ago, but Tulane has
pulled well ahead of Houston now as the league's premier program. Oh,
wait, there's someone else -- Rice will shift all of this quite thoroughly
on its head. TCU's stay in the league has to be considered a success; we'll
see how they do in a smaller pond.

This lineup has been much more stable, for better and worse, than it was
in the '90's. The glory days (for sufficiently small values of "glory")
of Notre Dame are gone, and the hyphens basically rule the roost.

One of the things about a league like the MAAC, which is one of the bottom
five in the country, is that nobody really notices how you do, other than
maybe by name recognition if you're the annual tournament cannon fodder.
LeMoyne is relatively good; Canisius is relatively and absolutely bad; no
one really cares that much about either. In their context, though, there's
a huge difference, and that is worth something, because that context is
largely determined well outside the control of anyone related to the
baseball program.

.899? 18 losses in 8 years? I know that ORU is a good fit in the Mid-Con
in every other sport, and I know there are complications with having one
team in a different conference, but won't someone think of the children?

I never realized that, but in the admittedly limited context of the MEAC,
Howard wasn't too bad. It would definitely be a boost for the league if
the occasional rumors came true, and they restarted baseball.

I know the difference between #23 and #28 isn't all that significant in
the grand scheme of things, but the NEC didn't use to be that bad;
defections by Marist, Rider, and UMBC have all hurt them. Long Island
used to be decent; they've dropped 40 games relative to .500 in the
last 5 years.

These speak for themselves fairly well, but I'll note that Oregon's last
record was misleading; that was the last year of the NorPac, so that
record was achieved against less-than-stellar UDub, WSU, and Portland
area teams.

Is there anything more beautiful than the fact that Army and Navy have
played to an exact tie for ten years in what has turned out to be the
nation's most competitive conference? The .601 is by far the lowest
winning percentage of any of the conference leaders.

LSU proves that slow and steady wins this particular race, anyway, leading
the way despite winning few titles over this stretch. Tennessee is under
.500 despite at least two CWS appearances during the time in question.

This is another one of those results that surprised me. Citadel has only
won two titles during this span, but last year was the first time they've
finished lower than third since 1996. The top 6 or 7 here make up a nice,
strong group.

This has been another one-horse race for the most part. Valley's 78-game
improvement relative to .500 between the two decade-long periods in
question may be the largest in the nation, although I'm too lazy to check.